HEH

Apparently some Republican group says Repubs would do better in polls with women if they used softer voices and focused less on facts.
PROBABLY, AM I RIGHT?

I haven't thought for a while about the ethics of taking, but it's on my mind today.

The ethics of taking:
exitus acta probat, aquilae non capiunt muscas and other Latin phrases.
I'm teaching Hebrew tomorrow, incidentally
plz help

 Zerlina Maxwell, a feminist writer, made the comment to Sean Hannity that maybe we should put more energy into telling men not to rape. Hannity retorts that such an approach is useless because "criminals won't listen." Since appearing on the show, Maxwell has faced a wave of death threats and other violent, angry responses.

Honestly my sweet justice warriors on ONTD_P seem to subscribe to the decidedly right winged and brutal policy of "some men rape therefore it's okay to treat all men as potential rapists" which really seems like logic I'd use to offend people.

There's this idea that has been injected into the cultural narrative that "job creation" happens something like this: a person comes up with an idea, but they need money to make the idea happen, so they go to a bank or a rich investor to borrow the money. Having borrowed the money, they are now able to start a profitable new business that will employ people.

Remember when "cultural narrative" involved the Odyssey instead of fucking whining?
I miss that.
I consider my cultural narrative epic poems and scifi, personally.
These whining cunts aren't part of my culture.

The problem with this narrative is that money does not start its life in the pockets of rich people. 

The only currency that matters to Zeus is honor.

Nor do jobs come from the minds of entrepreneurs. The reality is something more like this: what creates a "job" is economic demand for goods and services. Part of what creates that demand is money in everyone's pocket. But only part; actual physical needs or wants supply most of what constitutes demand, but economically speaking, 'demand' exists when someone is willing and able to pay for something.

Holy shit economics 101
I'm so proud of my little warrior.

What causes there to be less money in people's pockets? A huge factor in this is exploitation. The technical definition of exploitation is paying someone a wage that is less than the marginal revenue product of their labor - the additional value created by working one more hour. The less precise way of saying that is that exploitation is when you pay someone less than you make off their labor.

Until you can no longer quantify the value of something, that is.
What exactly is the value of the police?
On one hand they don't, in a strict market definition, produce anything.
They (in theory) keep you safe, though.
So their value is either a null (0, not quantifiable by definition) or infinite.
How do you pay them?
Where do they rank up?

Guns, like drugs and money, are fleurs du mal of the archons.

What?
WHAT?
WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TRYING TO SAY YOU PRETENTIOUS CUNT?
guns
like drugs and money
because those are three alike things, see
are the bad seeds (French phrasing) of the archons.
Archon being a classic Greek word meaning ruler.
So
guns and drugs and money are the products of the rulers--
except drugs can't be assigned a good or bad status because even though heroin addiction is bad opium itself is used as an analgesic.
Ever had surgery you retarded cunt?
Glad you didn't fucking die of shock?
You're fucking welcome says drugs.
Also I don't know how money is categorically a bad thing.
The alternate is a barter economy.
I guarantee you're some sort of feminist scholar and good luck trading your latest feminist paper for fish at the market.
The funny thing about people like this, to me, is that they cry out for the end of exploitation and yet they're exploiting the very system they seek to protect by not actually producing anything.
As a producer myself (education of an actual practical variety) I'm allowed to say this shit.
I'm on the inside.

They yield the opposite of what they promise.

Money does not cause harm.
Money must exist because the alternate is a direct barter economy or we go back to hunting and gathering.
Is this the fourth blog to indirectly propose rolling shit back to the neolithic era as a solution to our problems?
I guarantee neolithic culture wouldn't be the end to your dreaded rape culture.
In fact I'm certain rape would go up.
Not because man is inherently an animal (even though they are) but because you've created an even more unequal society where the strong can do literally whatever they want.
Also drugs have probably prevented a lot of diseases from killing you.
Even in your life.
I guarantee you had some sort of infection.

But the moment you become aware of this, it reveals a fundamental aspect of human nature we don't much like to talk about -- because this awareness in itself doesn't make you want or need them any less.

I mean I don't like not having tons of money but I don't blame the money for not jumping into my wallet.

Among the texts of the Nag Hammadi Library there is this one - the Paraphrase of Shem - that I've been looking at since last night. And TBH it kind of freaks me out.

Some Gnostic garbage undoubtedly.
EMBRACE ZEUS.
Yeah it is.
I hope your assessment of religion is as sweeping and ignorant as your analysis of economics.

First issue: where does this text come from? It seems to have been written entirely out of the blue. It is a Gnostic text but is not Jewish, Egyptian, Christian, Zoroastrian, Manichaean, Mandaean, Buddhist, Hindu, Platonist, Roman, or anything.

Not Roman, Buddhist or Greek?

Not fucking valuable.

It does not bear any characteristics that identify it as being a product of any particular sect or school of Gnosticism. There are no markers that identify when or where it was written, except that it must have been before 350 CE. It might have been long before then.

It's the fucking Necronomicon and if you read it too much an elder god bites your face off.

I work for a university, and have a wonderful perk in that I can take two classes per semester for almost no tuition and fees. 

Feminist scholar.
Telling you.

I didn't, however, count on the hidden costs of going to school while continuing to work full-time. I've been working essentially 60 hours a week since the summer of 2009. Doing so has had a deep impact on my health - just since last fall for example I've developed a repetitive strain injury and pinched a nerve in my shoulder (requiring drugs and physical therapy)

DRUGS
UUUUUH.   

I've not really explicitly spelled out what this term means to me. I've allowed it to sit in my mind and percolate as a sort of conceptual-perceptual template-filter.

What?
No, really, what?

meta- because I do not believe in subscribing to beliefs or thought systems or paradigms. Buying into a philosophy always seems to be a Faustian deal.

I know what every single word in those two sentences means but I have no fucking idea what she meant putting them together like that.
All I do know is meta 4 weapons are not a substitute for T2 weapons in EVE Online, unlike what most people say.
I'm  not even especially clear what "meta 4" means in EVE Online.
It's better than meta 3 I guess?
But in what way?
A lot of EVE Online is just repeating the weird phrases to other people without fully understanding what they mean.
Much like 1984.

	Any God who has ordained rape as part of His 'divine plan' for people is a God I oppose and defy to the last atom of my being.

As mortals we are not fit to judge the actions of gods. Not that rape is right we are just not in a place to judge Zeus. I think Christers would agree with me. Here's the one thing we can agree on: burn her. A while back I commented on the connection between Empire and starvation: the Empire keeps us all starving because we are more pliant that way and less likely to look up from our struggles to apprehend the bigger picture. Except Empires frequently expanded for the sole purpose of feeding their populations. Sooooooo there's that. This is the first thing I thought of when a friend on FB linked to this story: With nearly 14 million unemployed workers in America, man Stop. America isn't an empire. "An empire is a state with politico-military dominion of populations who are culturally and ethnically distinct from the imperial (ruling) ethnic group and its culture" says Oxford. I deleted the link to the "you write like" I Write Like is completely ridiculous. I just copied William Gibson's "Hinterlands" into it (Gibson is one of the 40 writers it will compare you to and it said he wrote like Margaret Atwood. I'm pretty sure he doesn't and also it should say William Gibson writes like WILLIAM GIBSON JESUS FUCK. ETA: I deleted the link to the meme and the code block it produces. Why? Margaret Atwood, one of the forty writers listed, was told by it she writes like P. G. Wodehouse. Forty writers, virtually all of them male, and all of them white. No one cares about that. The only thing that's important is it says you don't write like yourself. And I don't mean that in a special snowflake kind of way I mean if you're actually on this website and it can't tell if you write like you then it's clearly a poor judge of who you do write like. Anyway fuck the police I'm going. GOTTA TEACH HEBREW TOMORROW READ THEM RUNES THE WRONG WAY OKAY